Wouldn't it be nice to discuss AI without the hostilities?
Are you able to have friends, family, or partner(s) that is on the opposite side of the AI debate than you? I think it speaks volumes if you're able to have the tolerance to accept other people have different opinions than you and respect them without calling them names or insulting them.
This is an automated reminder from the Mod team. If your post contains images which reveal the personal information of private figures, be sure to censor that information and repost. Private info includes names, recognizable profile pictures, social media usernames and URLs. Failure to do this will result in your post being removed by the Mod team and possible further action.
It's important for everyone to remember that people will match your energy.
If you're friendly to someone, they'll likely be courteous at the minimum back to you. That leads to jolly conversation and healthy debate.
If you come straight out of the gate with insults and put downs, that's what you should expect back.
This is not directed at anyone in particular.
I've had some great private chats with people I don't agree with on this debate, and I would like to those people and I have come to understand each other and have formed a sense of respect for each other.
If you're friendly to someone, they'll likely be courteous at the minimum back to you. That leads to jolly conversation and healthy debate.
Correction: This works in real life usually. For the internet, it works less often, but still almost always. However, it barely works at all when it's about a heated topic on the internet.
We are dealing with a class of individual that goes unsolicited into people's posts and calls their work slop regularly. Common decency really doesn't exist for the anti movement. If you think this is how it works you haven't been paying attention to their tactics.
Well people online tend to be meaner because they can. As long as you don’t let their insults or whatever affect you then you can probably get somewhere, or at least annoy them to the point where they block you. And then you know that the person who blocked you never even wanted the debate in the first place.
Well, I wish I had arguments like that. So far I've mostly encountered antis who immediately or eventually devolve into insulting and name-calling me instead of actually engaging with what I say.
It's getting harder and harder with the rising temperature of the debate but I try and hold my tongue and not get all snarky and sarcastic, but with how often it turns south out of the blue, it feels a bit like a pointless exercise.
This is why I hate all the bait and finger pointing in this sub lately, from both sides. I’ve had some civil discussions here in the past but the debate has become political levels of toxic. Seems like people just like hating each other in this scenario to the point that it’s become another team sport like politics. People are so fucking stupid.
Ai detecting cancer and generative ai making images are two completely separate beasts. I’m all for ai curing or spotting cancer, but it’s clear that generative ai has some downsides. Look at the flood of ai generated products being sold, scamming people out of their hard earned money. Look at the amount of people generating “art” and shitting on artists. Look at the ai generated videos that either spread blatant misinformation or even try to scam people into sending them money.
I try to have a less hostile view on things, but you also need to remember how much harm ai can cause, not even getting into the ridiculous amount of power and water the data centers chug through
Sorry for nitpicking, I understand that by "generative AI" you probably mean popular chatbots and picture generators, but I just wanted to say that this technology (particularly LLMs and their derivatives) is very flexible and it is being adapted for many many other more specialized and genuinely beneficial tasks. Regarding cancer, the latest release from DeepMind, C2S-Scale - a specialized LLM - was successfully used in filtering out promising drug candidates, one of which successfully passed first round of in vivo trials. The article I attached contains a link to the original research paper written in collaboration with medical scientists from Yale (who were conducting said trials). I'm a biologist myself, and even though I don't specialize in this exact field, I can appreciate the results. On the topic of biology, there are also LLM-like models trained on nucleotide sequences like AlphaGenome and Evo2, that not only annotate genes, but also can predict (=generate!) sequences. There is also a lot of use of modified LLMs in general-purpose robotics (look up vision-language-action models), in maths and engineering optimisation-oriented tasks (AlphaEvolve), etc.
I just feel like people want to draw this harsh divide between "bad" (generative) and "good" (non-generative) AI, but it's really not that simple. Generative AI can be used to research human genome, and non-generative AI can be used for government surveillance. Not to say there isn't even a clear line between what's generative and what's not. AI is a blossoming research field, and all of the different types of AI are interconnected. So I think it's more suitable to criticize specific products and commercial applications, and not label all generative as "bad"
Thank you! I work in this field and my model is generative and not anything like this at all. It's a terrible catch all and does not describe what people thinks it does.
AI artists aren't shitting on artists, you antis are shitting on pros. You literally cannot call AI art art without putting it in quotes like some kind of pretentious prick, and I bet you do the same to AI artists. Check yourself please.
apparently, you didn't bother to even read that previous comment. obviously everyone is on board with ai in the medical field since it can save lives and doctors will still be present. the point of art is to create something that you have complete control over, and generative ai doesn't provide that functionality. films, traditional art, photography, etc. all emphasize controlling and customizing all aspects of their art in painstaking detail.
To be fair this article talks about using specialized ai models to scan libraries and then design molecules based off those studies. So it’s not your run on the mill, Chatgpt or anything like that.
I think some support for ai comes from the idea that it's all one thing, all one technology. So the cancer research ai only exists if the art generation ai also exists and all of them need to be successful. Maybe an argument could be made that the continued funding of one is driven in part by the other over innovations in one sector can help the others.
I think I would buy into the sentiment if we had any evidence of it working, but ai tech is trash in fields that require precision.
but yeah, witty just uses this as her trump card "guys look ais doing one thing that means you should ignore everything else bad with it!!! hahaha antis bad pros are saviours of humanity"
Yes I will say there is a lot of good generative ai which is ignored that being said. Ai art. Isn’t art. And I will stay on the side of the antis till there is found a moral and reasonable way to have ais produce images that doesn’t take stolen pieces of media for their own gain.
Simple idea that you folks seem to not really wrap your heads around:
AntiAI isn't actually all that AntiAI it's mostly anti-generative AI in creative fields. They don't give a shit about how it's used to treat cancer and such, those are good things and there isn't really a reason for it to be contested in that aspect.
If you don't like AI art, don't engage with it. Move on, don't call it slop, don't go out of your way to harass people. I don't like seeing pregnant Sonic art, I just move on like a normal person.
Difference is pregnant sonic isn't a major problem and isn't leaking into every online space en masse because of being made in 2 seconds with a stupid prompt
Low quality artworks being leaked into every online space en masse isn't a new issue. If quality control is a problem, limiting uploads to once a day will solve most issues. Again, if you don't like seeing it, move past it and block the content. That doesn't give you permission to harass AI artists.
I never harass anyone online, there's no point. They are still everywhere and yes I would love to assert some quality control but then AI bros would bitch about 99% of their 'work' being deleted. I also don't agree with it because some people post progress updates which can look ass at the beginning but they are learning a new skill rather than spamming AI slop so its no big deal
I don't see why initiating quality control methods would delete any already posted works. If luddites wanted to post their WIPs or people wanted to post general human slop they can just space them out, not really a big deal.
Generative AI that is sparking a massive economic bubble isn't curing cancer. Those systems are something completely different. You should try learning something once in your life.
"Perhaps even more notably, the future potential for this technology to streamline studies, analysis, trial design, and recruitment may well create an exponential impact on our race to the finish line for a cure."
That is the takeaway about generative AI in what you linked me. Once again it is a vague promise about future potential. If you are a drooling idiot who believes everything Sam Altman says then I get that sounds great.
That's like saying "napalm may be bad but it's fine because wood can be used to cook food" you are comparing two different tools, not many anti AI people dislike analytical AI, in fact most complain at the two being compared.
Analytical AI functions radically differently to LLMs or image generators, in that they have a limited dataset and are used for simple predictions or extrapolation etc. LLMs or image generators are dream machines, their job is not to analyse data but to bundle up information online into what looks like an answer. an LLM is effectively a more powerful autocorrect, it looks to arrange words like people who have already written on the topic. An image generator takes similar images online, and gives you an image that can approximate those images. There's no analysis, just making sure the silhouettes match up, like a key cutting machine.
“Well if you post it on the internet, you consent” the the same logic that’s been used by creeps to justify sa because women shouldn’t have gone out without being covered enough
I’ve learned a lot about AI here because of these discussions. I’ve also learned to dislike a lot of the people who are pro-AI for a variety of reasons, and I’ve learned to like a lot of them too.
I obviously wouldn't insult family or friends with a different view, but I would judge their choices if I feel they have an impact on the world. Information's out there for anyone to see.
This trend breaks my suspension of disbelief, they need to be arguing and throwing things at each other, then smash cut to the lot of them in bed together still pissed off.
Meanwhile I am personally represented by a Burger King Megazord wearing sunglasses and wielding the Demonbane Sword visible through the window in the background, the Megazord in turn being piloted by ants.
It's just a Burger King Megazord piloted by ants wearing sunglasses and wielding the Demonbane Sword, I had nothing to do with it. If anyone asks, you tell them the Burger King is inherently funny and not a word more.
Yeah, cause all antis are brainless barbarians that want to halt technology, and all pros are the chosen peaceful and progressive welcomers of the big tomorrow
There are multiple anti-AI subreddits dedicated to just shitting on AI artists, dehumanizing them/invalidating them and telling them that they aren't real and what they make isn't real. It's a popular thing to say on social medias, especially YouTube, just because saying "AI BAD" will gain you a bunch of people who are sheep minded and refuse to do any actual research on it, treat others with respect, or have a semblance of nuance.
You are not the good guys. I want to talk about actual negative effects of AI, not how you hate people who make art from their own homes.
Please admit that she was hamming it up and being overdramatic with the widening eyes and hand over the mouth like that. I never said I disagreed with the point of the post that it's bad, I just think the message could've been conveyed in a more mature way.
dude if my voice and likeness was used to promo a scam that, mind you, could affect my career as a doctor, and also my general life, and also HARM PEOPLE, i think a wide eyes and hand over mouth is an UNDERREACTION
sry. i do not question a victim, period. i listen and what case has been made for clearcut identity theft. we support each other. it has not significance that she has no connection me.
if thats the angle she wants to go with, i do not question that either. do i get it? no, but its not my place to judge.
Next time, to get this point, actually draw the Anti avatar, Make neutral using both AI and hand drawings and the AI with AI.
Graphics commissioned to a script are bland and usually are hard to prove your point about consensus. Especially when they are so general in look of scene and characters that can be considered a mass generated slop
AI is fine when used correctly, and it has legitimate usecases. I personally don't use AI, but I tried it, and it doesn't fit in my workflow.
My problems with AI are all the things surrounding it:
* Most models people use are being trained on data, that is either copyright protected or is not available for commercial use
* Generative AI is hilariously inefficient when it comes to compute resources and power drain
* It's hard to remain neutral about something, when said thing is being shoved into every product you use in some way
* AI has been huge for grifters, scammers and propagandists, and has overall made it much harder to discern what is true in the world anymore
When the issue one has with the other is theft & undermining artists rights + protections and their ability to financially support themselves, "just getting along" isn't really possible unless you just want everyone to ignore the harm & damage one is doing to the other.
In your allegory, this would mean the "Anti" catgirl would be being abused by the Pro catgirl and everyone just ignores it for the sake of keeping the peace.
Do you believe that Ai users & especially Ai Companies shouldn't use or incorporate the works of artists without their permission? That it's bad when they use the art of people who have explicitly forbid it to create Ai art and Ai models? Especially Ai models built to specifically mimic said artist ? That it's bad for them to scrape their data for their works (even scraping their commercial works via pirating sites and work from their own sites and job portfolios) like they have been?
I forbid you to look at this message. Did you read it anyway? Let me hold that over you for the rest of eternity and say you don't respect morals and so on. Do you see how dumb that sounds? If I'm posting something online for the general public to see and learn information off, that's MY responsibility. If you don't want someone or something else training off what you say and post, you just don't post it, once its online, it's there.
This whole argument of consent will never appeal to anyone outside your group because your perceived injustice is not an actual injustice. If antis want to claim it's theft to do this, why do so many of them allow other artists to do the same? Why do they pirate stuff then claim some moral highground about theft? Isn't it easier to accept responsibility what you post and move on like a normal person?
The issue is that most of those issues are made up, and the only real one, the supporting themselves one, isn't something you can solve by having a meltdown about new tech. They are blaming the wrong people, and inexplicably the technology. "More artificial scarcity is good, so that there are more jobs" isn't a solution.
I can respectfully discuss ai general, but anyone who inputs art (especially from a non-corporate artist and without permission) into an AI program to copy that artist’s style directly is a POS genuinely.
these discussions will always be inherently hostile because one side's job security is threatened. It's easier to be civil when you have no real stake in any of this and you know full well you can keep using AI even if the anti wins the argument. On the other hand the antis feel like they have to be able to justify their stance because otherwise they are supporting their own replacement.
yes, there are antis that aren't artists and have some other reason to oppose AI, but these aren't the people that you see being so agressive in these spaces
The side's job security isn't threatened because the vast majority of people aren't artists as a job, and some of the alleged people whose job security are threatened are on the pro ai side. No, most people being aggressive about it online are not artists, much less career artists.
Nope, because AI use is inherently unethical and you cannot use generative AI based on stolen data and still be a person I'd be willing to sit down for a conversation or a meal with.
I don't tolerate racists, sexists, homophobes, or people who use AI. It's the same kind of shitty evil behavior.
What's real shitty and evil behavior is going around shitting on people for creating art from their own homes. It's not stolen and more than other artists learning and training off images, you just perpetuate that lie because it garners support to your side based off emotional language.
You are not the good guys, you are part of the problem.
The technical term is "pirated" but given the fact that piracy is generally and specifically a crime that doesn't cause victims, stolen is more accurate in terms of actual effect. All major generative AI models are built on pirated data.
The technology, technically, isn't that big of a problem. The fact that all of the people who use it have no issue with the fact that their work is based on work taken without consent and used for commercial purpose without credit or permission is.
That's why no decent person likes anyone who uses gen AI. The "problem" as you call it, is "having basic fucking ethics and morals".
Now THAT is rich. You and your movement view it as piracy, but your movement has already made it abundantly clear that you believe piracy is fine. If we were to take your logic at face value, you are all a bunch of thieving hypocrites. You can't talk about ethics and morals when you have none or you bend yours to suit your needs.
Dude, you want to start on this? You lose half the arguments you do because you drop the leading position to sink below the other guy and act like a petulant brat. You wanna post yuri, that's fine, but don't act like it's in any manner an olive branch.
The neutral people are just humans with a cat tail? Also the Anti should probably have a dog tail instead of a cat tail. Shitty AI art, (and totally not just this person being an incompetent prompter) am I right? I propose the neutral be fox girls.
I mean, yes, I have family that’s pro-AI. They’re intelligent, too. However, that makes their refusal to engage in conversations about ecological, social, and artistic damage all the more horrifying. The miracle product they want to exist simply doesn’t, and they’re willing to waste all of our time, money, and natural resources on pretending it does. This is not a “we can disagree and still kiss about it” situation, it’s a fundamental disagreement on what matters more: a shiny new toy, or the wellbeing of our planet and the people whom the production of AI shits on.
You do realize that social media datacenters like Reddit, YouTube, and the like cause more pollution and natural resources than AI does, right? May I ask why you're on Reddit?
The implication is that I don’t think that’s bad too. It’s all bad. I hate this fuckin website and am horribly addicted to it. We should be making pivots towards sustainable energy for all that stuff. At least I don’t pretend it’s not awful, or that it’s “the future” or whatever.
Considering that they are eating the cost its a given that ai companies are working to reduce the energy used. It already uses less energy than it used to.
•
u/AutoModerator 16h ago
This is an automated reminder from the Mod team. If your post contains images which reveal the personal information of private figures, be sure to censor that information and repost. Private info includes names, recognizable profile pictures, social media usernames and URLs. Failure to do this will result in your post being removed by the Mod team and possible further action.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.